*BSD News Article 14919


Return to BSD News archive

Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!news.Hawaii.Edu!ames!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!bogus.sura.net!ra!wintermute.phys.psu.edu!news
From: kenh@leps5.phys.psu.edu (Ken Hornstein)
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.questions
Subject: Re: Problems installing NetBSD to coexist with DOS.
Date: 22 Apr 1993 07:33:48 -0400
Organization: Penn State, Laboratory for Elementary Particle Science
Lines: 83
Message-ID: <1r5vqs$ah5@leps5.phys.psu.edu>
References: <1627@rook.ukc.ac.uk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: leps5.phys.psu.edu

In article <1627@rook.ukc.ac.uk> dac@ukc.ac.uk (David Clear) writes:
>[NetBSD installation woes]

Don't feel that dumb ... I've ran into the EXACT same problems!
Luckily, I had a copy of pfdisk on an 386BSD boot floppy, so I wasn't totally
screwed.  I used the numbers from pfdisk and fed them into the installation
script, and everything seemed fine also.

>I played around with the numbers and found a start sector number which
>I think didn't hit the DOS partition.  I gave these to the NetBSD
>install program and the install started.
>At the point where the disklabel happens, it said:
>
>"Overwriting disk with DOS partition table? (n):"
>
>This threw me as it's not in the install notes and I haven't a clue
>what it's asking.  Is it saying it's just going to stamp on a disk
>which HAS a DOS partition table or is it saying it's going to WRITE a
>DOS partition table or that the disk area it's writing to is COVERED by
>an existing DOS partition?  Anyway, whether I entered 'y' or 'n' the
>results were the same (it seems).

I really hate this; I ran into the exact same problems with disklabel when I
was trying to do disk partitioning under 386BSD.  Talk about a worthless
message!  But the results are different; if you hit "y", then all you get is
the NetBSD partition; if you hit "n", then all you get is the MSDOS parition.

>After the install,  which went fine and the OS did boot from the hard
>disk, I rebooted from an MSDOS system floppy and ran FDISK again to
>look at the partition table.  The only entry in there was the NetBSD
>root partition of type 'NON_DOS'.

Yup, same here.

>I checked the install notes for 386BSD and that says to make just one
>partition for DOS and just leave the rest of the disk uncovered by any
>DOS partition.  I haven't tried that yet but will do later.  Will the
>NetBSD install program append that unreferenced disk area to the DOS
>partition table?  Is that how it's meant to work?  If that's the case,
>how do I find the sector size and offset of that area?

I made a 386BSD boot floppy before and I installed pfdisk, from the bootmenu
package (comp.sources.misc, volume 15).  That's the only way I made it this
far.

I did manage to get one step farther; remembering that 386BSD wanted a parition
ID of 165, I used pfdisk to make a parition with that ID number.  _then_ when
I installed, I didn't get that damn message from disklabel.  Unfortunately,
now when I get to the point where I use install disk 2, I get the message
"panic: init failed" :-(

>Finally, the NetBSD system I installed worked fine.  Except that,
>doesn't 386BSD have a 'reboot -todos' command or something similar?  I
>couldn't find a way to take the system down so it would reboot to DOS.
>
>Now something a little worrying.  After completely bogging the
>installation, I tried to re-install DOS.  I rebooted from the DOS5.0
>install disk and it said 'Determining your configuration', accessed the
>disk and hang.  I had to boot from another system floppy and use FDISK
>/MBR (and my DOS manual doesn't actually quote what that command
>does).  Also, before I have completely wrecked a 386BSD installation to
>the point where in would no longer install from scratch correctly.
>This was because the geometry on the disk label was wrong.

This really drove me bonkers too; I had to take my disk to another computer,
comment out the call to SETUP in the autoexec.bat so I could use FDISK :-(

>I think this is awful.  What crud is the installation leaving on the
>disk to make it know it has been there before?  Is there any way to
>remove it?

Try a low-level format; worked for me.

>Anyway, all that doesn't worry me right now.  I've got two days left -
>help would be appreciated!!  I'm sure this sort of thing is a breeze if
>you know PCs.

While I am by no means a PC whiz, I feel that this installation procedure is
severely lacking for NetBSD.  I don't mean to criticize the NetBSD gang; when
I installed it on the whole hard drive, I really loved it.  But unfortunately
I need to have it co-exist with DOS.  Anyone know what we are doing wrong?

--Ken